Five years after the violent clashes in northeast Delhi that resulted in the deaths of 53 individuals, predominantly Muslims, courts in the National Capital have identified significant misconduct in police documentation related to various cases.
According to a recent report by the Indian Express, out of 97 acquittals linked to the Delhi pogrom, local courts have highlighted serious deficiencies in police investigations in at least 17 instances, amounting to nearly one in five cases examined.
As of the end of August 2025, judicial decisions have been made in 116 of the 695 cases involving rioting, arson, and unlawful assembly filed by the Delhi Police. Among these, 97 resulted in acquittals, while 19 ended in convictions.
The reported misconduct includes complaints scripted under police direction, reliance on “fictitious” witnesses, and instances of “fabricated” evidence. Investigating Officers added “additional facts” to witness statements, while claims by constables of having spotted accused individuals at crime scenes were described as dubious. In several cases, the identification of accused persons was surrounded by uncertainty, with accusations characterized as “foisted” upon them.
In one notable incident, Maktoob reported the wrongful inclusion of a Muslim victim’s name in a chargesheet for arson and rioting, despite this individual, Babbu, being killed by a Hindu mob while returning home from work—an event recorded on CCTV.
A lawyer involved in these cases remarked, “It is concerning to witness the Delhi Police engaging in such gross misconduct. Frequently, it appears they have merely transcribed content from a book.”
The Indian Express investigation further revealed that in at least 12 cases, courts found evidence of counterfeit witnesses and fabricated information introduced by police. In a couple of instances, witnesses alleged their statements had been dictated or modified by police officers. Moreover, courts concluded that investigations were often conducted with the objective of closing cases rather than delivering justice.
One judge explicitly noted manipulation of case records during a ruling. Acquitting six defendants from a case associated with the New Usmanpur police station, Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh highlighted in his order last month that the Investigating Officer had significantly padded evidence, resulting in a serious violation of the accused’s rights. He remarked, “Such instances lead to serious erosion of faith in the investigative process and the rule of law.”
This article originates from Maktoob Media.
Tags: Delhi courts, police reports, riot cases, serious issues, 2020 riots
Hashtags: #Delhi #courts #find #issues #reports #filed #police #riot #cases
